REVIEW 3 cited by
A Survey on Automated Program Repair Techniques
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
With the rapid development and large-scale popularity of program software, modern society increasingly relies on software systems. However, the problems exposed by software have also come to the fore. Software defect has become an important factor troubling developers. In this context, Automated Program Repair (APR) techniques have emerged, aiming to automatically fix software defect problems and reduce manual debugging work. In particular, benefiting from the advances in deep learning, numerous learning-based APR techniques have emerged in recent years, which also bring new opportunities for APR research. To give researchers a quick overview of APR techniques' complete development and future opportunities, we revisit the evolution of APR techniques and discuss in depth the latest advances in APR research. In this paper, the development of APR techniques is introduced in terms of four different patch generation schemes: search-based, constraint-based, template-based, and learning-based. Moreover, we propose a uniform set of criteria to review and compare each APR tool, summarize the advantages and disadvantages of APR techniques, and discuss the current state of APR development. Furthermore, we introduce the research on the related technical areas of APR that have also provided a strong motivation to advance APR development. Finally, we analyze current challenges and future directions, especially highlighting the critical opportunities that large language models bring to APR research.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
ReCode: Improving LLM-based Code Repair with Fine-Grained Retrieval-Augmented Generation
ReCode improves LLM-based code repair by combining algorithm-type prediction with dual-encoder retrieval of authentic bug-fix pairs, and introduces RACodeBench for evaluation.
-
Agentic Program Repair from Test Failures at Scale: A Neuro-symbolic approach with static analysis and test execution feedback
Meta's Engineering Agent solved 42.3% of curated internal test-failure tasks offline and landed 25.5% of generated fixes in production over three months.
-
The Impact of Fine-tuning Large Language Models on Automated Program Repair
On three Java APR benchmarks, LoRA and IA3 adapters match or beat full-model fine-tuning for most tested code LLMs while training less than one percent of parameters.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.